Beatles music to start entering UK public domain in 2012?

A government-sponsored intellectual property review is expected to conclude …

The Gowers Review has been a big deal in Britain, where former Financial Times editor Andrew Gowers is chairing a commission that will suggest ways to reform the UK's intellectual property laws. One key piece of the Review will focus on the copyright term for sound recordings. Artists and publishers want the term extended from its current 50 years to 95 years, but an inside source has now confirmed that the Review will not recommend the 45-year extension, according to the BBC.

Given the high-profile names that argued for the extension—musicians like Sir Cliff Richard and Bono—the news is a surprising victory for those in favor of more limited copyright terms. The official report from the Gowers Review is expected in the first week of December, and if the government acts on its conclusions, then songs from hit acts like The Beatles will come out of copyright in the next few years.

The BPI, Britain's recording industry trade group, has already made its feelings known. In a statement today, the group said that it "has not yet seen the Gowers report, but if the media leaks are correct it would appear that the Gowers Review has missed a great opportunity to support the UK's music industry—both the musicians who make a living out of music and the companies who invest in them."

The group also notes that any suggestions from the Gowers Review are simply that—suggestions. They are not binding on the government, and the BPI hopes that the copyright extension will still pass in Parliament. The group trumpets a recent survey (which it sponsored) that shows 62 percent of British consumers agree "that UK artists should be protected for the same number of years as their American counterparts."

"Harmonisation" doesn't sound so sweet

The wording of the BPI survey highlights the fact that the extension debate has been framed in terms of "harmonizing" the UK's rules with those of the US, which already grants a 95-year term. Harmonization is generally a one-way process, though, one that leads toward more restrictions and increased IP protection. Why isn't anyone in America worried about harmonising US law with the 50-year British copyright term?

The expected results of the Review will please left-leaning think tank IPPR, whose own report on the issue argues for making knowledge a common good first, and only secondarily a private right. They won't be as appealing to the British Library, which has recently argued for a host of copyright reforms, among them an extension of the copyright term to "life plus 70 years."

But to those UK users who want to start mashing up Beatles tunes, the news will sound sweet indeed.

Update: A British Library spokesperson tells Ars that the Library only supports a "life + 70" term for books and unpublished papers. In the debate over sound recordings, the Library's official position is that "the copyright term for sound recording rights should not be extended without empirical evidence and the needs of society as a whole being borne in mind." The Library will also be releasing a detailed response to the Gowers Report when it becomes available.